[This interesting case study pursues the struggles over the development
of a particular heritage site, and shows the importance of local
political alliances in defining what counts as heritage, especially
given the particular framework in Britain of 'partnership'
financing. There are clear links with the material on the Third Way
--e.g. this file].

Heritage production involves social relations, including relations with
locals. There is a need to make the site look authentic for visitors
and for locals, for example -- locals are 'an increasingly insistent'
player, especially where they 'own' the history in question (30).
Further, heritage professionals rely on local testimony to generate the
popular stories it uses to make sense of the attraction. As a result,
locals, and their political organizations, are an important mediator of
market forces. The local dimension reminds us that resources can be
steered towards one heritage site only at the expense of another. The
specific issues are as important as the general critiques or
ideologies.

The case-study in question concerns a struggle over some famous coal
mines in the Rhondda and Taff Ely area of Wales (both of these
areas were represented by borough councils with rather different
political views). As these mines closed, various options were discussed
on turning them into heritage sites. The main political players were
the Welsh Office, dominated by Westminster, and the local political
organizations and communities. The first initiatives came from those
local communities of ex-miners, but as the scheme developed and
required resources and regulation, the formal political organizations
became increasingly involved. The project similarly changed in its
conception from 'a small, local, loss-making and publicly funded
heritage museum' to a 'flagship entrepreneurial and wealth-
generating project'. (31). The Welsh Office in particular saw the
project as a chance to demonstrate community regeneration through
enterprise and public-private partnership. Opposition to that project
shows the impact of local politics, and tells us a lot about specific
dimensions of 'heritage'.

Dicks studied the history of the founding and development of the
project, involving interviewing with local gatekeepers, analysed the
audio-visual shows, and interviewed 20 visitor groups and guides. Focus
groups were run with local residents. A useful theoretical link can be
made with Hall on the encoding and
decoding of cultural texts.

Government became interested in using heritage to do cultural planning
and urban regeneration in the 1970s and 1980s, linked to notions of
'entrepreneurialism, competitiveness and privatisation' (32).
Although public sector funding was involved, 'the rhetoric,
priorities and strategies of the market' came to dominate
management (32). This commercialization led to a number of
prominent criticisms, including those of Hewison. One aspect of the
criticism turned on whether or not heritage offered authentic history,
and some counter critics were able to argue that it did offer the
possibility of resistance. [Samuel, R. (1994) Theatres of Memory, London: Verso
looks particularly good].

Critical debates in the 1990s focused instead on local social and
political relations in economic regeneration, and included debates over
things such as redevelopment of wasteland and gentrification. The
struggles over 'place identities' were typically linked to social class
differences.

In the case of heritage projects, there were too many different kinds
to generalize. For example, some were more controversial locally than
others: those distant in space and time from local issues are less
controversial. On a more specific level, local opinion can be expressed
in different political systems, reminding us not to
'romantic[ize] a notion of popular protest' (33), simply diametrically
opposed to those interests in marketization.

Marketization itself varies, according to the actual mix of private and
public sector funding and control. In particular, there is now a
'competitive bidding system' [encouraged by the Lottery?].
Initially, there was hardly any private money at stake, but
rather 'a powerful discourse of the market' to revitalize public
administration (33). The usual terms refer to both partnership
and enterprise, but these are still general terms, put into practice
locally in a complex way, involving different agencies and other
groups. Claims to power are based both on market values and also local
democratic ones, and notions of 'local identity, authenticity,
representativeness and tradition. In other words, Heritage has to
be "marketed" to local residents too' (34). Heritage is
particularly difficult to grasp as a simple commodity, unlike other
cultural artifacts such as 'images, objects, landscapes and
buildings' (34).

In the Rhondda, coal-mining was in serious decline in the 1980s. The
debate about regeneration discussed re industrialization on the one
hand, and ' a service-sector oriented solution' on the other
(34). The issue of resources ruled out the former. Initially, the UK
Welsh Office managed intervention through advocating free-market
values, packaging various policy initiatives, including a renewal of
leisure and tourism. Partnerships with the private sector were
encouraged, involving local authorities contributing to funding as
well, especially in tourism. The Rhondda project was one such
'flagship' attraction (35). Local councils would bid
competitively for funds.

The Rhondda Heritage Park emerged out of a project to preserve the
colliery as a mining museum. Local mining enthusiasts rapidly lost out
to 'local councils and Welsh Office quangos' (35), and their
enthusiasm remained only as local support for local government planning
initiatives. For example, local people were not allowed to actually
provide displays and exhibits, despite their offer to do so and
consultants were engaged instead. Applications for funds to the next
layer of government up produced further modification as the project
became part of the more general tourism strategy( which involved
bidding for national funds) -- the consultants soon recommended a
large scale 'multiplex leisure development', owned by a
consortium.

The consultancy model was already well-established in the Welsh
Development Agency and expressed 'a new managerial philosophy' to
replace the old local amateurism. It became essentail for professional
funding. However, local involvement and local knowledge became
devalued. The resulting project was seen as a 'massive three-site
development', combining the original mining museum with other
attractions such as 'country parks, a ski slope, chairlift,
forest walk and camp, a retail development, a railway museum and a
steam train to connect all parts' (38). The intention was to
'forge a new set of place-myths for the Rhondda', instead of preserving
the old mining values.

However, the grand project proved too ambitious. There were planning
delays, a lack of private investment, and divisions inside the
management consortium. In particular, a local competition between the
boroughs and other layers of political systems developed. Borough
councils in general did not like the large plan, and they began to
compete among themselves as development seem to favour first one area
and then the other. As partners, the councils also attracted local
political activity and critical press coverage. National political
parties became interested as well, and Plaid Cymru campaigned against a
heritage park with increasing success. Eventually, funding was made
conditional on market values, and this seemed to disadvantage one
borough council in particular (Taff Ely).

In order to generate revenue, the consortium opened existing buildings
-- the colliery -- which further privileged Rhondda Borough Council.
However, visitor numbers were low [ 'Since there were few
interpretative facilities' (39) -- I would like to see evidence for
this]. The Labour Party had been associated with the colliery project
and 'coalfield culture', hence it became opposed by other
parties, and Plaid Cymru gained seats in the Taff Ely Borough Council,
partly on a pledge to withdraw from the project. The funding package
collapsed. What was left was the original idea of the 'small and
bounded museum' based on the colliery.

'In this sense, marketization failed because it forced the
borough councils to treat the local heritage as if it were a commodity
which... threw them into competition with each other' (40).
Marketization also weakened local public support by going for the
general appeal to 'as wide a number of people as possible', at
the expense of the 'local memorial aspect' (40). Money was spent
on national marketing and national consultants instead of local
research: what remained was a collection of 'colourful stories
from the very group of mining enthusiasts that had originally been
pushed aside' (40). As the grand plan collapsed, issues of local
authenticity became crucial, and consultants were urged to employ a
local historian. The result is a celebration of an 'activist
Rhondda community', which is 'romanticized' but also 'recognizable' to
locals (40).

The struggles now seem to have been settled, and there are some more
general leisure activities at the site. Local people sometimes bring
'relatives from the far flung Rhondda diaspora' (40), and locals are
now more appreciative. Even once-vocal opponents are now employed as
guides.

Local knowledge was celebrated, but only through the mediation of a
local historian. The 'people's story', with all its complexity,
is still absent. The 'sponsors' allegiance to the values of enterprise
and place marketing' seem to have won out (41). However, the full
'rational market ideal' was not successful, and the 'local social
sphere "bit back"' (41). Political competition seems to have been an
unwelcome aspect of entrepreneurial competition.

Heritage must appeal to locals as well as to sponsors, which prevents
full marketization. Local political and cultural involvement prevents
simple commodification [for now]. This contradiction is not
usually recognised in the general enthusiasm for heritage 'as the
glue that can magically stick together the values of the market and the
public sphere' (41). The Rhondda Heritage Park has not been a
particular economic success either -- but 'what the area does
now "possess" is a heavily capitalized, popular and
informative show case for local mining history' (42).